The former Secretary of State says that she urged President Obama to “lift or ease” the U.S. embargo against Cuba, as AP paraphrases a passage from her forthcoming memoir.
Secretary Clinton made the
recommendation at the end of her time in office, arguing that the embargo is
ineffectual in Cuba and harmful to U.S. relations in the Americas. In April
2012, she and President Obama attended a regional summit in Cartagena, Colombia
where the entire hemisphere told the United States that Cuba will no longer be
excluded from such meetings. That position was reiterated
at an OAS meeting this week. The next summit takes place in Panama next year.
It is not surprising that a former
U.S. official finds our policy ineffective or counterproductive and calls for
it to change. That happens all the time. What’s more interesting is Secretary
Clinton as a Presidential candidate calculating that the political sweet spot
is to be critical of the Cuban government’s human rights practices while also
questioning the value of the embargo itself.
In the frame of reference that has
been used for decades, such a position poses a risk for her in the general
election. But that frame of reference is worn out too. Cuban-Americans split
50-50 in the last Presidential election and Cuban Americn elites are starting
to break in a new direction. The knee-jerk Republican position, to tighten the
embargo and go back to the days of limiting family visits and remittances,
ensures that Republican candidates compete for a shrinking and aging part of
the Cuban American electorate.
Polls are a great way to measure
political change, but it’s also valuable to watch how professional politicians
position themselves. Charlie
Crist and now Hillary Clinton have told us a lot.
No comments:
Post a Comment